The Glade 4.0

No, not "likely" could ahve hurt bystanders, "possibly" could have hurt bystanders.

Fankly, unopposed maniacs shooting places up unopposed have a much higher success rates at mass body counts than people being shot back at, by the police or anyone else. There's no telling what a gun-weilding criminal is, at the time, either, until he starts shooting the place up or runs away. Expecting people to not defend themselves just because of "likelyhoods" is appalling. Small comfort to the victims of, say, a Luby's shooter, that it was unlikely he was going to shoot the place up before he did.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Well, your example just said "someone else"; not "someone else you're not related to" but even then why would you make a law like that? Suppose it was a close family friend, but not a relative? Yes, that's a lot closer relationship than the McDonald's employee, but why would a state start drawing arbitrary lines about how close a friend someone has to be for you to shoot someone who is attacking them?

In any case, yes, Elmo is right.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Except that I haven't even bothered to look at the ethnicities of anyone involved, since its utterly irrelevant. But keep guessing. Its cute.

/facepalm

Look, random citizen carrying a gun can make this decision for himself. I've been in a number of situations, and one thing I've learned is that body language and other factors make a huge difference in what the "proper" course of action is. So much so that I would never question another's decision in this regard.

Furthermore, we're not even talking about a random citizen. This is a trained ex-cop. Would you expect an active cop to let the robbery take place? He's not far removed from that.

I'm not guessing at all. You only care, just like everyone else, because a white guy shot a black kid. In fact, that's the entire reason this made national news. If a black guy shot a black kid ...

No one would say anything.

If a white guy shot a white kid ...

No one would say anything.

However, the last two threads on justifiable homicides on the Glade involve White Guys shooting Minorities. And you're sure full of opinions that antagonize the white guy in an oblique manner ...

But, you know, keep trying to think you're smarter than the rest of us.

You honestly don't care about the specifics or bystanders involved in this case. You probably don't even care about the shooting or the fact someone is dead. The only reason you even know or have an opinion on this subject is because ...

A white guy shot a black kid.

That's pretty much all there is to it.

_________________

Honestly I think this is more about a retired cop shooting a teenager than anything to do with race.

I've looked at 12 news articles and not seen a single reference to the ethnicity of the former police officer.
I've seen a single video from the incident that shows the reaction of the gunman's sister so I now deduce that the gunman was african-american.

But No, Just because you think in those terms Khross, does NOT Mean the rest of us do. I never brought ethnicity into this discussion and in fact NO ONE did until you. (except Diamondeye who mentioned it regarding some other incident, not the current incident)

This. I'm not sure where Khross is getting his info. Especially since the only headline posted here is: "Teen robbery suspect dies in shootout with retired police officer."

No mention of race at all.

Khross, you are so racist to suggest that this is driven by race. Guns are wrong, and people should not have them unless they're in the employ of the government.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

I haven't seen anyone suggest that Khross is racist or that guns are wrong.

I would like to suggest that Khross is a racist and guns are wrong.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

For the record I said "I question the decision" not "It was wrong"

I'm not certain either way. 14 shots fired in what is (by all accounts) a crowded McDonalds seems like a good place for a lot of innocent bystanders to be hurt. Wouldn't it have made more sense to let him get away and be caught later?

I assume that both sides had the chance to fire a couple of shots (I'm sure we'll never know) I wonder if the former officer got a killshot right off the bat, and the gunman was shooting for a while before he lost consciousness and died-- Is that typically the case DE? That the fatal shot is exchange early but someone 'goes down shooting'?

You guys are funny ...

How many justifiable homicides happen in the United States during a given year?

How many make national media?

What characteristics of those that make national media are shared beyond the patently obviously and required?

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/homicide/justify.cfm

There are enough justifiable homicides in the United States in a given year that the current average is 1 per day nationwide.

Guess what makes this one special?

_________________

Where are you seeing any reference to the ethnicity of the officer Khross?

I'd also like to point out that Detroit is 82.69% African-American, and DPD is 63% African-American. Even though the officer is retired, unless you have evidence to the contrary (which is possible, I don't deny the possibility exists) but its far more likely that both individuals were African-American.

I don't see how this is even debatable. I'm firmly against using lethal force to protect property and I think the shooting is justified. He pulled a gun on the staff, at that point people's lives are in danger, you don't know what the robber is going to do. Anyone would be perfectly justified in shooting him.

Did anyone read the story about the convenience store clerk a few months ago that was held up by two teenagers with guns? Same white-on-black situation. He shot the first one, and the second one ran away. He ran after the second guy and shot him in the back, then came back into the store and finished off the first guy who was unconscious. That's a controversial shooting. This isn't.

Except, that's statistically improbable for justifiable homicides, as I linked above ...

Likewise, it's statistically improbable for justifiable homicides that make national news. White shooter, minority victim ...

After all, you didn't hear a damn thing about the two shootings where I live last week ...

(Both Black on Black by the by, and both involving armed minors) ...

_________________

I question the decision to pull a weapon in a store too, but the kid made it anyway. He's the one choose violence. He's the one who chose violence again when challenged (as opposed to fleeing or surrender) by opening fire.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Random stuff that occurs to me...

Nowhere in any article that I've seen has the retired officer been identified (and one article went so far as to say that Detroit police have refused to identify the officer) but I'm pretty comfortable asserting that, lacking facts, we expect the story to go a certain way. If you're talking about archetypical law enforcement, or authority in general, you're talking about a white guy. None of these articles mentioned whether the retired officer was a man or a woman, either, but how many of us were wondering about that?

I have looked and haven't yet come across one article that identifies either the sex or race of the retired officer.

That said, I don't know that this has made headlines necessarily because of racial issues.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Jeryn:

It's not news if it's a minority on minority shooting in Detroit -- Cop, Minor, Retired, Male, Female or any other detail you want. We're talking Detroit -- Black on Black shootings happen once a day.

_________________

It's kind of like when a politician gets into a scandel, if they leave off the party affiliation, it was Democrat.

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."

You've hit on the key for why it's reported Khross. It's different than the "norm" so therefore noteworthy or "newsworthy". Sometimes race is the factor, but in this case I think it's just the cop vs teen angle.

It's not Cop vs. Teen, else the two minors shot here by police officers would have made the news ...

Or the one in Tallahassee several months back ...

Or ...

It's news because it's White on Minority, or can be easily made to appear that way in the newspaper.

It's not Cop vs. Teen because that's a) passe and b) totally non-interesting given the entire problem with urban demographics in the United States.

_________________

If the former police officer wasn't identified to the media, then the media can't know one way or another to publicize it (or as is your assertion) bury it if it were the intraracial violence.

If the media does know but is withholding the information, then they're failing to report exactly the 'juicy' information that you're accusing them of exploiting.


Could it instead be the fact that this is a crime that took place:
a) in broad daylight
b) in a crowded public place
c) in a nicer part of town (according to news media)

This is not a late night convenience store shooting, nor is it a home invasion.

The cop wasn't black. Nobody who has a legitimate job or makes money or works within the system is black. They forfeit their right to be considered black when they work for the white man. They become part of the problem; sell-out white men with black skin persecuting the black man.


Or something.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █